Skip to main content
Glama

AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue)

KP: Part of Fortune

astroway_vedic_kp_fortuna
Read-onlyIdempotent

Part of Fortune (Lot of Fortune): ASC + Moon − Sun (day birth) or ASC + Sun − Moon (night birth). Sub-lord chain attached for KP-style usage.

[Group: Vedic] [Cost: 20 credits (Tier 2)]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNo
dateYes
nameNo
timeYes
fieldsNoCompact mode: comma-separated dotted paths to keep, relative to `data`, e.g. "planets.name,planets.longitude,houses.cusp". Omit for the whole response.
ayanamsaNoSidereal school by name. Lahiri when omitted. Equivalent to ayanamsaId; send either.
latitudeYes
timezoneNoIANA zone name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto to look the zone up from latitude and longitude. The server takes the offset that zone kept at this local date and time, summer time included, and uses it in place of timezoneOffset. A clock time that happened twice takes the first occurrence; one skipped when clocks went forward takes the offset from before the change. Abbreviations such as EST are refused. Before 1970 the tz database is not reliable for every place, so send timezoneOffset when the local clock is known.
cosmogramNo
longitudeYes
precisionNoCompact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.
ayanamsaIdNo
zodiacTypeNo
houseSystemNoP
timezoneOffsetNoHours from UTC at the given moment, not minutes. Fractional zones are hours too: 5.5 for India, 5.75 for Nepal, -3.5 for Newfoundland. Defaults to 0, meaning UTC. Ignored when timezone is sent.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNo
houseNo
lagnaNo
formulaNo
isDayBirthNo
fortunaLongitudeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered and the bar is lower. The description usefully discloses the computation semantics (day vs night birth) and that a sub-lord chain is attached. It does not add auth, rate-limit, or output-shape context, but return shape is covered by the output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The formula is front-loaded and the whole description is one tight sentence plus a short trailing clause. The credit-cost and group tags are metadata rather than wasteful prose. Efficient, though slightly dense for the amount of invocation nuance it omits.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the purpose/formula is complete. However, for a 15-parameter tool with low schema coverage, the description omits any guidance on required inputs or optional modifiers, so it is minimally sufficient rather than complete for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 15 parameters and only 33% schema description coverage, the description carries a heavy compensation burden but offers zero parameter-level guidance. It never mentions date, time, latitude, longitude, ayanamsa, house system, or the compact-mode fields, leaving the agent to rely entirely on the partially documented schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the specific computed point (Part of Fortune / Lot of Fortune) and gives the exact day/night formulas, so an agent knows precisely what is calculated. It also signals the KP sub-lord chain augmentation. It does not differentiate itself from adjacent siblings like astroway_aspects_arabic_parts or the Hellenistic Lot-of-Fortune tools, but the technique is stated concretely.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no named alternative among the many lot/fortune siblings. The phrase 'for KP-style usage' implies a context but does not tell the agent how to choose this tool over the KP sub-lord or Arabic-parts tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources